Weight Index Charts for White-tailed Deer in Texas
Weight
Index Fawn
56
130%
55
128%
54
126%
53
124%
52
122%
52
120%
51
118%
50
116%
49
114%
48
112%
47
110%
46
108%
46
106%
45
104%
44
102%
43
100%
42
98%
41
96%
40
94%
40
92%
39
90%
38
88%
37
86%
36
84%
35
82%
34
80%
34
78%
33
76%
32
74%
31
72%
30
70%
BUCKS
1.5
92
91
89
88
87
85
84
82
81
80
78
77
75
74
72
71
70
68
67
65
64
62
61
60
58
57
55
54
53
51
50
2.5
109
108
106
104
102
101
99
97
96
94
92
91
89
87
86
84
82
81
79
77
76
74
72
71
69
67
66
64
62
60
59
3.5
122
120
118
117
115
113
111
109
107
105
103
102
100
98
96
94
92
90
88
86
85
83
81
79
77
75
73
71
70
68
66
Ranch _______________________________
4.5
137
134
132
130
128
126
124
122
120
118
116
113
111
109
107
105
103
101
99
97
95
92
90
88
86
84
82
80
78
76
74
5.5
142
140
137
135
133
131
129
126
124
122
120
118
116
113
111
109
107
105
102
100
98
96
94
92
89
87
85
83
81
78
76
6.5
144
142
140
138
135
133
131
129
127
124
122
120
118
115
113
111
109
107
104
102
100
98
95
93
91
89
87
84
82
80
78
Weight
Index
130%
128%
126%
124%
122%
120%
118%
116%
114%
112%
110%
108%
106%
104%
102%
100%
98%
96%
94%
92%
90%
88%
86%
84%
82%
80%
78%
76%
74%
72%
70%
DOES
Fawn
48
47
47
46
45
44
44
43
42
41
41
40
39
38
38
37
36
36
35
34
33
33
32
31
30
30
29
28
27
27
26
1.5
74
73
72
71
70
68
67
66
65
64
63
62
60
59
58
57
56
55
54
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
44
43
42
41
40
2.5
85
83
82
81
79
78
77
75
74
73
72
70
69
68
66
65
64
62
61
60
59
57
56
55
53
52
51
49
48
47
46
3.5 +
90
88
87
86
84
83
81
80
79
77
76
75
73
72
70
69
68
66
65
63
62
61
59
58
57
55
54
52
51
50
48
County _______________________________ Year(s)___________________
Comments:______________________________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Instructions Circle the average of field-dressed weights for each age class of bucks and does. A minimum of three weights per
age class is needed for a reliable average. Determine which weight index zone the herd falls into. Compare that to stated ranch
goals, regional averages, or use as a multi-year trend indicator.
Using Field-Dressed Weights as a Nutritional Index for White-tailed Deer
Steve Nelle, NRCS Biologist, San Angelo
Good harvest records are an essential part of a good deer management program. These records will include ages and weights on
all bucks and does harvested. This information can be used to tell the rancher or manager important things about his deer herd and
deer habitat. Lighter weights normally indicate habitat and nutritional problems, while higher weights are indicative of good
nutrition and good habitat.
The Weight Index Charts on the reverse side list a range of field-dressed weights for each age of deer from 70% to 130% of the
state-wide average. The 100% weights are the average of six regions in Texas and generally indicate adequate nutrition. An index
of 80% would indicate that weights are 20% below the state average, while an index of 120% would indicate that weights are 20%
above the state average. These averages were derived from over 11,000 deer for three different years. Data was collected by
TPWD.
Since does reach their mature body size at an earlier age, all does 3.5 years of age and older can be averaged together. For bucks,
each age class should be evaluated separately since they continue to increase in body size through age 6.5. The chart is not
intended to evaluate the quality of individual deer, but rather the average for the population. At least three deer are needed to get a
reliable average for an age class. Avoid the temptation to use only the heavier deer to make an average. All bucks and does
should be weighed on good scales (not estimated). All deer should be aged by someone experienced in tooth wear patterns.
By plotting the average weights for several years, the manager can gain a good understanding of the nutrition his habitat is
providing. Interpretation of a single year weight index should be made with caution. A dry summer and fall will cause harvest
weights to be lower even in a well-managed herd. A wet summer or fall or a good acorn or mesquite bean crop will cause weights
to be higher than normal. Notations of this sort should be recorded in the comments.
Weight indexes will tell the rancher or manager if his herd is performing at the desired level. If the goal is to produce higher
numbers of deer with lower antler potential, an index of 90% may be appropriate; however the habitat will not improve. If the
goal is to produce large-antlered bucks at the expense of numbers, the weight index should be in 110% range and above. For
does, even in extremely well managed habitat, the index will seldom be above 110% due to increased fawning and twinning rates.
Refer to the chart below for general characteristics of each weight index:
Weight Index
Herd Characteristics
Habitat Characteristics
70% - 80%
Severely overpopulated
Poor body condition
Low fawn crops
Spikes very common
Poor antler development potential
Very limited available food supply
Poor quality nutrition
Over-use of deer food plants
Browse lines; Severe hedging
80% - 90%
Somewhat overpopulated
Medium fawn crops
Spikes common especially in dry years
Fair antler development potential
Low to moderate supply of deer food plants
Over-use of better plants
Near 100%
At or near carrying capacity
Good fawn crops most year
Spikes present but not numerous
Good antler development potential
Good supply and quality of deer food plants
Most food plants not over-used
110% - 120%
(Bucks only)
Below maximum carrying capacity
Good antlers even in dry years
Some trophy potential
Very good supply, quality and
variety of deer food plants
120% - 130%+
(Bucks only)
Well below maximum
carrying capacity
Excellent antler development
Good trophy potential
Excellent deer habitat providing high nutrition